2026 Midterm Elections Thread

[Trips]

That’s why I said basically the next dem president has to make construction workers wear hats saying “this job was given to me by President Newsom () and the Dems” for people to get it.

And they will still vote in a Red Wave cause of their economic anxiety.

 

[br82186]

Republicans gonna lose mad state legislatures.

Ya’ll can say What you want but the most wicked shyt the republicans did cutting Medicaid, and food stamps don’t kick in until 2026. People are already sick of them and the real pain hasn’t kicked in. That is why so many of them in congress aren’t even going to waste their money and put their lives at risk campaigning in 2026.

Dont get me started on the bad economy due to stagflation and the trickle down effect cuts to medicaid will have on medicare. Republicans are fukked until 2032, maybe 2036…. fukk around 2040.

We'll see, we ALL thought this in 2020 and look what happened.

 

[Piff Perkins]

The online far left also has to understand that a large segment of voters primary interest is preserving whiteness so they will vote for republicans no matter how much "good" the dems do.

Which is why the primary goal should be tangible economic accomplishments that improve lives. The problem is that we've had a decade plus of democrats deciding that identity politics is the most valuable political currency. It allows you to accomplish nothing for "POC" while waving a flag that says hey I care about you. Well when the economy is trash that shyt doesn't work anymore.

You're never gonna get most of the racist to vote for you. You have to provide a stable economic situation that alienates those people while making normal whites say "things are getting better." You do that by lowering housing costs, healthcare costs, GAS prices, etc while providing opportunities.

 

[Loose]

Which is why the primary goal should be tangible economic accomplishments that improve lives. The problem is that we've had a decade plus of democrats deciding that identity politics is the most valuable political currency. It allows you to accomplish nothing for "POC" while waving a flag that says hey I care about you. Well when the economy is trash that shyt doesn't work anymore.

You're never gonna get most of the racist to vote for you. You have to provide a stable economic situation that alienates those people while making normal whites say "things are getting better." You do that by lowering housing costs, healthcare costs, GAS prices, etc while providing opportunities.

Correct, You have to give racist whites less incentive to vote, the ecomomy and cost of living being good is one of them. Unfortunately we have a few stupid posters in here that don't understand that concept, they think people are saying we should court racist whites lol.

 

[CrimsonTider]

Which is why the primary goal should be tangible economic accomplishments that improve lives. The problem is that we've had a decade plus of democrats deciding that identity politics is the most valuable political currency. It allows you to accomplish nothing for "POC" while waving a flag that says hey I care about you. Well when the economy is trash that shyt doesn't work anymore.

You're never gonna get most of the racist to vote for you. You have to provide a stable economic situation that alienates those people while making normal whites say "things are getting better." You do that by lowering housing costs, healthcare costs, GAS prices, etc while providing opportunities.

How do you accomplish this when you the only legislation you can pass is budget reconciliations?


Biden did a lot in these areas but no one cared in the end.(Lowering Obamacare premiums, Capping insulin). Gas prices are still low now because of Biden record breaking domestic oil drilling. forgiving billions of student loans and creating new payment options.

 

[CrimsonTider]

Correct, You have to give racist whites less incentive to vote, the ecomomy and cost of living being good is one of them. Unfortunately we have a few stupid posters in here that don't understand that concept, they think people are saying we should court racist whites lol.

Racist whites will never ever have less incentive to vote in AMERICA. Dems counter this vote by energizing the alethic voters which will always be hit or miss.

 

[wire28]

Racist whites will never ever have less incentive to vote in AMERICA. Dems counter this vote by energizing the alethic voters which will always be hit or miss.

Yep. Like clockwork fox will say a new migrant invasion, new crime, new trans books etc right around election time and that bat signal will wake them right up. They know how to keep the people moving. So while some in here want Bernie to continue to court the racists around the country in bumblefukk USA, maybe we should focus on mobilizing our base and loyal voters. A few dummies might come along for the ride but we shouldn’t be on tour courting “aggrieved white men”.

 

[Loose]

Racist whites will never ever have less incentive to vote in AMERICA. Dems counter this vote by energizing the alethic voters which will always be hit or miss.

So why do republicans lose elections if they always have the incentive to vote ? Why aren't republicans vote totals static ? Why is Trump currently losing support ? Why don't they vote at large numbers during midterms and off year elections?

 

[CrimsonTider]

So why do republicans lose elections if they always have the incentive to vote ? Why aren't republicans vote totals static ? Why is Trump currently losing support ? Why don't they vote at large numbers during midterms and off year elections?

Because of human nature. People aren't as motivated when their party is in power. Also its very easy to blame the party in power for all issues and vote for change.

 

[Loose]

Because of human nature. People aren't as motivated when their party is in power. Also its very easy to blame the party in power for all issues and vote for change.

This argument makes no sense. If a group is always motivated by racism, then it shouldn’t matter who’s in power; they would consistently show up to vote. You can’t claim that racism is such a powerful, natural motivator that it drives people to the polls, and then dismiss the idea that a strong economy could reduce that same motivation. If racism is supposedly their core political engine, it shouldn’t switch on and off depending on whom is in power.The reality is simpler: they hold racist views, but their political engagement is heavily influenced by economic conditions. When the economy is bad, their plumbing business, auto shop, coal mine, or factory is struggling; they’re fired up, angry, and looking for someone to blame. That’s when they show up to vote. But when things are going well for them financially, they don’t care what Trump or anyone else is saying. Their outrage isn’t constant; it’s conditional. Their racism doesn’t disappear, but their motivation to act on it absolutely fluctuates with their economic comfort.

 

[Pull Up the Roots]

Correct, You have to give racist whites less incentive to vote, the ecomomy and cost of living being good is one of them. Unfortunately we have a few stupid posters in here that don't understand that concept, they think people are saying we should court racist whites lol.

The belief that improving the economy will meaningfully disincentivize racist voting habits ignores a lot of this country's history. Some of the most fierce racial backlash happened during periods of economic growth, especially when Black people made social or political gains.

People who make this argument misunderstand that white racism isn't so much a reaction to material hardship, but a reaction to a perceived loss of status. The more the racial hierarchy is chipped away at, the strong they react. Look at the white backlash during reconstruction, look at post-ww2 and the new deal, look at desegregation, or even the Clinton years. shyt, you can even look at the Obama years. If economic conditions alone determined voting behavior, we wouldn't have seen those levels of backlash.

Now, I'm not saying that economic policy doesn't matter. It does. And it should be the focus. But pretending it neutralizes racial resentment oversimplifies the problem and misreads the history of this country.

 

[Loose]

The belief that improving the economy will meaningfully disincentivize racist voting habits ignores a lot of this country's history. Some of the most fierce racial backlash happened during periods of economic growth, especially when Black people made social or political gains.

People who make this argument misunderstand that white racism isn't so much a reaction to material hardship, but a reaction to a perceived loss of status. The more the racial hierarchy is chipped away at, the strong they react. Look at the white backlash during reconstruction, look at post-ww2 and the new deal, look at desegregation, or even the Clinton years. shyt, you can even look at the Obama years. If economic conditions alone determined voting behavior, we wouldn't have seen those levels of backlash.

Now, I'm not saying that economic policy doesn't matter. It does. And it should be the focus. But pretending it neutralizes racial resentment oversimplifies the problem and misreads the history of this country.

We are talking about voting behavior, not racial backlash, and the two are not automatically connected. From the 1930s through the 1980s, Democrats largely dominated national politics. The Republican Party did not pose a serious electoral threat until the economic downturn of the late 1970s, which helped bring Ronald Reagan into office. This shows that you can have racial backlash without a corresponding voting backlash. When the economy is stable, racial resentment does not necessarily translate into higher turnout. When the economy is unstable, however, voting patterns shift dramatically. Economic anxiety played a major role in the rise of the Reagan administration, the political wave that reshaped the Obama presidency in 2010, and the conditions that helped Donald Trump win support. After World War Two and during the New Deal era, even as desegregation created intense racial resentment among many white Americans, they did not mobilize in large numbers at the polls because the economy was strong. Their racial anger existed, but it did not convert into political action.The pattern is consistent. The most volatile political moments in the United States tend to occur when white voters, especially those in economically vulnerable positions, feel financially insecure. When they struggle, the country enters periods of political upheaval, and the consequences ripple outward. One of the most dangerous thing in America is a poor white man which we're seeing today.

 

[Pull Up the Roots]

We also see people with strong union jobs, good pay, and solid benefits voting for parties that oppose labor protections. That suggests that identity, culture, and status come before material conditions for a lot of these people.

 

[Json]

We are talking about voting behavior, not racial backlash, and the two are not automatically connected. From the 1930s through the 1980s, Democrats largely dominated national politics. The Republican Party did not pose a serious electoral threat until the economic downturn of the late 1970s, which helped bring Ronald Reagan into office. This shows that you can have racial backlash without a corresponding voting backlash. When the economy is stable, racial resentment does not necessarily translate into higher turnout. When the economy is unstable, however, voting patterns shift dramatically. Economic anxiety played a major role in the rise of the Reagan administration, the political wave that reshaped the Obama presidency in 2010, and the conditions that helped Donald Trump win support. After World War Two and during the New Deal era, even as desegregation created intense racial resentment among many white Americans, they did not mobilize in large numbers at the polls because the economy was strong. Their racial anger existed, but it did not convert into political action.The pattern is consistent. The most volatile political moments in the United States tend to occur when white voters, especially those in economically vulnerable positions, feel financially insecure. When they struggle, the country enters periods of political upheaval, and the consequences ripple outward. One of the most dangerous thing in America is a poor white man which we're seeing today.

There’s a bit of truth in what your saying but it ignores a major world wide depression and we were in a military conflict from WW2 to Vietnam.

There was a major backlash. It just wasn’t completely racial. The anti-war and women’s movement both gained traction along with the Civil Rights movement.

Those conditions will never be replicated just on the simple fact there’s no draft anymore

 

[Pull Up the Roots]

We are talking about voting behavior, not racial backlash, and the two are not automatically connected. From the 1930s through the 1980s, Democrats largely dominated national politics. The Republican Party did not pose a serious electoral threat until the economic downturn of the late 1970s, which helped bring Ronald Reagan into office. This shows that you can have racial backlash without a corresponding voting backlash. When the economy is stable, racial resentment does not necessarily translate into higher turnout. When the economy is unstable, however, voting patterns shift dramatically. Economic anxiety played a major role in the rise of the Reagan administration, the political wave that reshaped the Obama presidency in 2010, and the conditions that helped Donald Trump win support. After World War Two and during the New Deal era, even as desegregation created intense racial resentment among many white Americans, they did not mobilize in large numbers at the polls because the economy was strong. Their racial anger existed, but it did not convert into political action.The pattern is consistent. The most volatile political moments in the United States tend to occur when white voters, especially those in economically vulnerable positions, feel financially insecure. When they struggle, the country enters periods of political upheaval, and the consequences ripple outward. One of the most dangerous thing in America is a poor white man which we're seeing today.

Voting is one of the main ways racial resentment expresses itself politically. The two are deeply intertwined. You can't cleanly separate one from the other.

And your framing is ahistorical. You're collapsing several very different political eras into one and misrepresenting how power actually shifted. Republicans were already winning national elections well before the late 1970s, and the Democratic "dominance" of the mid-20th century depended heavily on a racially exclusionary Southern bloc.

The major realignment wasn't driven primarily by economic downturns but by civil rights and the restructuring of racial and regional politics. Economic stress mattered, but it didn't create the shift, it helped mobilize it.

The New Deal is a perfect example of this, because the coalition explicitly excluded Black Americans to maintain white Southern support.